War

Discussion in 'General Off-Topic Chat' started by VVoltz, Mar 24, 2008.

Mar 24, 2008

War by VVoltz at 5:03 AM (1,352 Views / 0 Likes) 11 replies

  1. VVoltz
    OP

    Member VVoltz The Pirate Lord

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2002
    Messages:
    2,727
    Location:
    USA
    Country:
    Bolivia
    No, I'm noy talking about Warcueid, I mean real warfare.
    I've heard a few times that violence is within the essence, that sooner or later is always the strong one that is gonna get victorious over everybody else.
    Well, I think that my faith in mankind, for whatever the reason is what will make this place a better place, I seriusly think that taking away the life of somebody is the worst mistake a man can make and the worst damage a person can cause, not only to the victim but to the people that care for the victim, war is like a mass murder scenario, where your job is actually to take other people's lifes, that's gotta be the worst job ever.

    Then off course no one can deny that in terms of knowledge and scientific discoveries, war is really a good thing to best equipment, gadgets and service overall and in the end a better quality of life.

    Is there anyone here that actually agrees with War, any War?
     
  2. DarkUli

    Member DarkUli GBAtemp Regular

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2008
    Messages:
    130
    Location:
    Portugal
    Country:
    Portugal
    I don't agree with war, violence has proved to never lead anywhere.
    No matter how you look at it, there's always a more pleasant, non-violant solution.

    Some people though, rush the gun, and screw up.

    For soldiers on real warfare, altough their stealing someone else's lives, their always reminded by one thing: The family they have at home and the country their serving. That keeps them going, I think.

    I'm no real expert when it comes down to debating whether (How do you spell that?) I agree with war or not, but I'm trying to state an opinion here, even though all I own is theory and not experience (And seriously never hope I ever gain that experience).

    I'll shut up, I'm confusing myself a bit lol.
     
  3. xcalibur

    Member xcalibur Gbatemp's Chocolate Bear

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2007
    Messages:
    3,166
    Location:
    Sacred Heart
    Country:
    United Kingdom
    I think that war is a valid last resort. Some people just don't listen.
    But if you jump the gun and skip past any negotiations or if you use it to oppress other countries, thats just wrong.
     
  4. Dylan

    Member Dylan 100 MILES AND RUNNIN'

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2008
    Messages:
    1,639
    Location:
    Sydney, Australia
    Country:
    Australia
    If it is truly necessary it must be done.
     
  5. CockroachMan

    Member CockroachMan Scribbling around GBATemp's kitchen.

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2006
    Messages:
    3,889
    Location:
    Brazil
    Country:
    Brazil
    Well.. History shows us that it was necessary, sometimes.. the US Independence war, World War II, French Revolution.. those were necessary, people didn't had another choice.

    Now, today, we have globalization and a lot of ways to deal with our problems.. also, no country tries to invade and conquer others anymore so wars aren't really necessary.. Almost every war in the last 30 years were unnecessary IMO.. specially the ones were US was involved.

    Also, war today is a lot more coward, you just press a button and hundreds of people are dead.. is a lot easier to kill someone when you are not seeing his face..
     
  6. psycoblaster

    Member psycoblaster Divine

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2008
    Messages:
    2,132
    Location:
    Seoul.. (in Korea)
    Country:
    Korea, South
    By the way
    World War II started just because Hitler was greedy and wanted more land, and he chose to take more land by force. He needed a way to make an excuse to start attacking, because it would be against the law to just say "i'm gonna take this country by fighting" and take over... so he dressed up one of his men in a Poland?ish way, and made him shoot one of his men, so he could say a poland person (don't know if it was poland- learned this long time ago [​IMG]) shot one of his man, and he started to attack.
    Then the defensive side (they really did have a choice), instead of doing something in peace, they CHOSE to fight back, and then the world joined.

    If they just gave up that one European country instead of fighting, everything could have turned out fine...

    ah I don't know if this was right
    Finland... Poland... I don't know [​IMG]
     
  7. xJonny

    Member xJonny ...

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2007
    Messages:
    1,395
    Country:
    Poland, and England had a support agreement with Poland I think
     
  8. yuyuyup

    Member yuyuyup GBAtemp Psycho!

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2006
    Messages:
    3,303
    Location:
    USA MTN timezone
    Country:
    United States
    I believe our country should have a powerful military, but for-profit trillion dollar cash sprees in Iraq, I just aint so hot on that

    Repubs see their huge blood/oil soaked dollars fading as the pendulum swings come election day
     
  9. LokusT

    Newcomer LokusT Advanced Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2007
    Messages:
    63
    Location:
    Northern Ireland
    Country:
    Ireland
    I've thought about this many times in my life and it's always been a moral dilemma. I don't agree with using force unprovoked at all, and I would always prefer diplomacy in it's place to avoid confrontation, but I do respect that war within humanity or even the animal kingdom is a very natural thing. Whether it's about money, power, conviction of beliefs or anything else, it's just something that humans do in the heat of passion.

    What I have always wondered about though is if for instance there was a national draft and I was called up to serve. I am not a nationalist so fighting for my country in that respect wouldn't make me pick up a weapon. Nor would I do so to fight for my beliefs unless probably, and this is the only reason i could think of, it directly harmed or threaten loved ones.

    I agree totally that modern warfare begins completely with a literal push of a button. It's become just too easy and it's done by the people that have to carry that on their conscience and never by the people that give the go ahead for war.

    I do however have respect for soldiers that are on the frontline fighting in a fair fight, whatever their reasons for doing so because it still takes great determination and courage to willingly take the life of another. Saying that though, I wonder how many of them still feel remorse later in life for doing so. I couldn't do it. I don't have the guts or desire to take another person's life and I don't believe it's my right to act as another person's judge in their execution.

    Sometimes war is necessary when all other channels have failed. I don't think I could personally play a part in it though. I guess maybe it's not just my belief but also my own cowardice that would stop me from doing so. I owe a lot to my grandfathers who both fought in World War II for my future, I respect what they did because they had to. I just don't think I can do what they did.
     
  10. CockroachMan

    Member CockroachMan Scribbling around GBATemp's kitchen.

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2006
    Messages:
    3,889
    Location:
    Brazil
    Country:
    Brazil
    About WWII.. AFAIK, When Hitler started invading other countries, no one cared.. Western Europe were a lot more afraid of USSR than of Germany, they had hope that Hitler would enter USSR and stop communism..
    Germany had a secret non-aggression pact with USSR which also stated that each nation would have half of Poland, when Germany invaded Poland, then the world saw that he would not confront the soviets and decided to go to war.. Hitler's big mistake was breaking the pact with USSR and trying to invade them..
     
  11. ZeminkoX

    Member ZeminkoX GBAtemp Regular

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2004
    Messages:
    115
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    Country:
    United Kingdom
    The superpowers in Europe let Hitler do what he wanted for a long time. They did not rush into war at all. In fact, if they HAD rushed into war and taken Hitler down earlier it would have made things ten times easier.

    Hitler started off with marching right into the Rhineland, which was set as a demilitarised zone under the Treaty of Versailles. Then he overthrew the Austrian government and made Austria part of Germany. At this point Britain and France were starting to be much more wary of what was happening.

    Hitler then invaded Czechoslovakia and took it over. Britain and France both appeased this, saying that they would not attack provided Hitler left it there. When he started asking for parts of Germany back that were removed by the Treaty of Versailles Britain and France grew more worried and pledged a support of independence to Poland.

    Then Hitler invaded Poland and Britain and France were forced to declare war. So by no means could Hitler have been stopped peacefully. Not unless you were willing to give him the entire planet. [​IMG]
     
  12. TLSpartan

    Member TLSpartan Kills threads

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2006
    Messages:
    2,053
    Country:
    Australia

    When he did invade the Soviet Union, he invaded them during the winter(Keep in mind, this is the Russian winter we are talking about). He made the exact same mistake as Napoleon. He may have won if attacked after winter but Hitler wasn't a good commander
     

Share This Page